But, the bastard didn't give up the goods on what they are offering Higgins. I am guessing $2.75mil for 3 seasons, and RD's bread slicer.

If Higgins had been an UFA after the 2010-11 playoffs then he would definitely gotten $2.75M. After last year I don't think any player on the Canucks current roster, outside of Burrows, is going to be looking at a raise in pay unless this season suddenly gets under way and the Canucks manage to pull of another President's Trophy and go deep in the playoffs. A 3rd or lower finish in the West and a 1st round exit will likely spell the end of the road for several guys on this roster, and Higgins might be one of them.

dbr wrote:Honestly man, I don't mean any offense by this but you might want to consider breaking the habit of pulling stuff out of your ass, it really detracts from your posts (which are otherwise solid)..

I think this may sum up some differences between posters. Some lik to chat like they're sitting in the Pub having a beer, relaxed and just chatter. Others want to do an hours research or what ever and state proven facts like it was a case before the courts. ??

dbr wrote:Honestly man, I don't mean any offense by this but you might want to consider breaking the habit of pulling stuff out of your ass, it really detracts from your posts (which are otherwise solid)..

I think this may sum up some differences between posters. Some lik to chat like they're sitting in the Pub having a beer, relaxed and just chatter. Others want to do an hours research or what ever and state proven facts like it was a case before the courts. ??

dbr wrote:Honestly man, I don't mean any offense by this but you might want to consider breaking the habit of pulling stuff out of your ass, it really detracts from your posts (which are otherwise solid)..

I think this may sum up some differences between posters. Some lik to chat like they're sitting in the Pub having a beer, relaxed and just chatter. Others want to do an hours research or what ever and state proven facts like it was a case before the courts. ??

Fred maybe that is the difference.

I'd be embarrassed to be incorrect about concrete facts that were central to the points I was trying to make, whether it was in the pub or in a court of law.

It's why I usually still take 30 seconds to double-check something I'm not sure about - or else say something along the lines of "I think I recall hearing/reading/seeing.." - even if I am not taking a discussion very seriously.

To me it's just common courtesy to put a modicum of thought and/or preparation into a post because I read other posts and expect some others will read mine.

Others might feel differently, that's fine.

Anyway this is all meant as a statement about my approach to message boards in general, not an elaboration on my original criticism of Meds (who, again, I think is a solid poster).

Meds wrote:If Higgins had been an UFA after the 2010-11 playoffs then he would definitely gotten $2.75M.

Chris Higgins was a UFA after the 2011 playoffs. That's how we were able to acquire him at the trade deadline.

Honestly man, I don't mean any offense by this but you might want to consider breaking the habit of pulling stuff out of your ass, it really detracts from your posts (which are otherwise solid)..

Shit. You're absolutely right. For some reason I got a year ahead of myself and a year behind at the same time. Talking about renewing Higgins, who I knew signed a 2 year deal at $1.9M per.....and the fact that we haven't started a season yet..... Who knows where my head was at.

dbr wrote:Honestly man, I don't mean any offense by this but you might want to consider breaking the habit of pulling stuff out of your ass, it really detracts from your posts (which are otherwise solid)..

I think this may sum up some differences between posters. Some lik to chat like they're sitting in the Pub having a beer, relaxed and just chatter. Others want to do an hours research or what ever and state proven facts like it was a case before the courts. ??

No need to correct or admonish him there Fred. He's bang on. I, for one, don't mind being corrected when I fire up something that was completely wrong.....especially when it is something I knew damned well but just screwed up the thought process.

To be honest alot of my posts are coming between calls on night shifts, so I don't have a great deal of time to do research, and in this particular case I simply mixed up dates and shit and my brain told me that Higgins signed 2 years and if he was due for re-signing then obviously year one took place during the 2010-11 season.....whoops.

No admonishment even thought of, it was more a general comment on different approached to the forum that some times lead to some unpleasantness

dbr To be honest it was not you I had in mind, some get more upset than others with detail. Myself I've always been a big picture man, thank heavans for secretaries and accountants The article from Canucks Army I quoted was good to me. No specifics to think of but more an insight into Gillis and Gilmans concepts and ideals, how they view the game and the Canucks. I find that much more insightful than reams of stats

Well look at us, all being nice and friendly. Who knows what might have happened if not for rats' preemptive strike.

Anyway.. if the cap remains the same I'd say Chris Higgins is worth more than $2.5m on the open market - but that's probably about the most the Canucks would offer him under the 'covenant' described by Gilman in that article.

And to add an unsettling comparable to consider when thinking about Chris Higgins market value let's look at the stats of a winger who now makes $4m/year:

David Jones (28 years old)
Career 0.28 goals/game 0.49 points/game
Last Year 0.28 goals/game 0.51 points/game
Best Year 0.35 goals/game 0.58 points/game